Carroll Commencement
Fairborn commencement
Badin graduation
Ellen Belcher is the Dayton Daily News opinion pages editor. She writes about state government, education, the environment, higher education and all things Dayton.
Martin Gottlieb is an editorial writer and columnist for the Dayton Daily News opinion pages. He focuses on the political process itself and does such national issues as war, the economy, taxes and Social Security, as well as a hodge-podge of local and state issues.Home > Blogs > A Matter of Opinion > Archives > 2009 > October > 23 > Entry
Editorial: Even if casinos are called for, Issue 3 isn’t
2009 ELECTIONS
Whenever there’s a gambling issue on the ballot, discussion turns, as it should, of course, to the specifics of the plan at hand.
In the case of Issue 3 on the Nov. 3 ballot, the plan collapses in appeal upon inspection. It is designed to give specific companies what they want: the casinos they want; the sites they want; the tax rates they want; you name it.
This is an utterly preposterous way for a state to do business, a preposterous way for Ohio to enter the realm of casino gambling, even if one supports casino gambling.
But what about casino gambling itself?
What about the big picture? Is a state better off to have four casinos than none?
The case for casinos these days starts with the fact that other nearby states have casinos. This results in Ohioans spending their money elsewhere, while no one is bringing this kind of money to Ohio.
One seldom hears this downside of putting casinos in Ohio: If casinos are even more prevalent — more convenient — more people will gamble. And people who already gamble will gamble more. Nobody can seriously dispute either assertion. The honest advocates of casinos don’t even try.
Not only would more people gamble, but more people who shouldn’t gamble would gamble. That is, more people who have a gambling problem. Resisting a temptation to drive to Indiana is one thing. Resisting a drive downtown is another.
To expand gambling opportunities is to make a conscious decision to add to society’s social problems, to weaken families, to undermine more lives — whatever alleged good a casino might also do.
The most common rebuttal to that point is that a free society has to put adults in charge of their own lives. Nobody, after all, will force anybody to gamble. People ought to have the option. Adults who can control their impulses should not have their freedom infringed upon because some other people — a minority — can’t.
This is an argument that must be taken seriously. Virtually all Americans have embraced the call to individual freedom about one controversy or another: guns, speech, alcohol, pornography, tobacco. Sometimes it prevails. Sometimes it doesn’t. (Drugs, prostitution.)
In some areas, the possibility of banning enticement to self-destructive behavior by adults is never taken seriously. (Sugar, fast food.)
With regard to gambling, society has taken what might be called a middle ground. Some forms of gambling are legal and/or prevalent, and others aren’t. State lotteries are everywhere (wherein governments not only allow gambling, but encourage it). Racetracks are all over Ohio. Internet gambling proliferates. Private poker games are common. Nonprofits use gambling to raise money. And, of course, many states have casinos.
The result is a virtual absence of restraint on the right of highly motivated gamblers to gamble.
So the strength of what might be called the libertarian case for casinos in Ohio — that adults ought to be free to waste their own money — is minimal. People have that freedom.
If, as society seems to have decided, a balance is to be struck between the good and bad effects of gambling, then all logic points to the need for considering the specifics of any proposal.
That is, the decision is made that, for some reason, nearby casinos should be added to the mix — a dubious notion itself — then sharp attention must fall on the specifics, on how to allow for casinos.
At that point, surely all reasonable people can agree that the way to do it is to allow for a casino (or a certain number) under certain regulations (including state-set tax rates), and then allowing for bids, for competition among developers. The best way is obviously not to allow certain developers to put their own proposals into the state’s constitution.
Permalink | Comments (15) | Post your comment | Categories: Editorials, Elections, Martin Gottlieb, Ohio politics, Sports and Recreation
Comments
By Sean
October 23, 2009 7:49 AM | Link to this
How is putting Casinos in Ohio going to create more problems? As this article states, anyone can get on a computer and gamble at anytime already. With that in mind, a gambling addict is going to gamble whenever they want already, so why not put some Cassinos in Ohio and generate some additional tax dollars for the State? Based on this argument, we should also close All liqour stores and bars because an alcoholic might go have a drink!
By Ken
October 23, 2009 7:52 AM | Link to this
Ah, yes, the crusade continues. Ellen Belcher is determined to defeat Issue 3 to save us from ourselves. How many edtorials do you need to write? We get your opinion, another do gooder out save us all. When you are the last person to leave Ohio turn out the lights.
By How?
October 23, 2009 8:50 AM | Link to this
What is the upside to not having casinos?
By joe_mamma
October 23, 2009 8:57 AM | Link to this
I’ll translate for everyone what Martin is saying. First he thinks the primary reason a casino should come to Ohio is to supply the state with tax dollars, not supply the population with jobs and services. Second he thinks that gambling is bad for society in general and arguments concerning free adults being able to make their own choices regarding gambling can be ignored because they have other gambling outlets available to them such as lottery, race tracks etc… Thirdly he thinks that everyone can agree that if we are to allow casinos in Ohio it should be done through the legislature not through a ballot initiative so that the focus should be on regulating them and taxing them.
By HREdux
October 23, 2009 10:43 AM | Link to this
Casinos, the real world: what has two decades of having 20+ casinos done for Mississippi? Still dead last in per capita income, math, writing, and total number of best educated; still a bottom feeder in median family income, number completing high school — plus the highest poverty and obesity rates. Casinos did help to boost employment in pawn and porn shops and massage and tattoo parlors. It’s not about claims and promises – EVER.
By mlh
October 23, 2009 11:24 AM | Link to this
Vote for allowing casinos, but don’t vote for a bill that restricts open business competition and doesn’t give the legislature the power to regulate. This amendment is inappropriate and bad for future development.
By ken
October 23, 2009 12:22 PM | Link to this
“One seldom hears this downside of putting casinos in Ohio”. I love this line. The DDN has nothing but write articles about EVERY possible downside of casinos the last 3 months. Most of which are not valid. Really Martin & Ellen, we have heard all the arguments. We need the jobs and our legislators will NEVER do their job on this issue, so if we don’t get the best deal we could, blame them.
By UpforCasinos
October 23, 2009 1:00 PM | Link to this
Time for Casinos to come to Ohio,the last deal would have put one very close to Dayton,this deal who knows how far we will have to go.JOBS/JOBS/JOBS that is what I argued for the last issue and I say the same this time,I agree that if this amendment is flawed then why did our legislator let us down.Time to get into the modern world.Casinos are not going to be the boom to Ohio that we have been promised but then more of money will still be in Ohio !!!
By JL
October 23, 2009 10:37 PM | Link to this
Jobs and moral debates aside for a moment - (and allow me to qualify) I have read the proposal and plan to vote for it - why is it that Ohioans have not written a proposal. In the truest of cliche terms, why not have a State of Ohio Constitutional Amendment that is written by an Ohioan, for Ohioans.
By dhampton100
October 24, 2009 8:11 AM | Link to this
The main problem I have with casinos coming to Ohio is that it allows another predator business to operate out in the open and licensed others to gorge of those less initiated in protecting themselves from harm. While I firmly believe people should be allowed to self destruct if they want to, I have strong feeling against those who desire to take advantage of people simply because they are stupid. I will be voting NO for that reason and that reason alone. We have more than enough gambling avenues in Ohio. Stupid people already have plenty of vehicles through which they can throw away their family’s food budgets. We certainly don’t need another. Take that corporate disguised Mafia controlled (odds always in their favor) mess back to Indiana and keep it there.
By ohiorox
October 24, 2009 11:01 PM | Link to this
heres a question, why cant we have a state ran casino? just like the lottery and the state gets all the money, not just 33%. maybe its not that simple, but id rather have that than some guy or corporation getting paid. its not like hethey will get taxed more when compulsive gamblers quit their jobs to blow their lives on gambling. or when they need goverment assistance to help their kids go through school. or governtment assistance to help them pay for food. every been to a bingo hall? the people there arent drive bmws or wearing designer clothes. i have no problem with gambling, i just dont do it. but i have a problem supporting these people who want the right to waste their lives, money and FAMILY
By Katmandu
October 25, 2009 12:16 PM | Link to this
I support bringing casinos to Ohio. But, I’m very leary about HOW this will be implemented when it passes. Having only (1) developer build them in only (4) select cities appears wrong to me. Plus the fact there will NOT be a casino anywhere close to Dayton SUCKS !! I’m still up in the air about Issue 3! Someone convince me one way or the other now!
By Donna
October 25, 2009 12:48 PM | Link to this
i am voting for casinos coming in. Ihave played the ohio lottery since it started and have only won once in a while,”NOTHING TO BRAG ABOUT” maybe i’ll do better in a casino!!
By Don
October 29, 2009 12:40 PM | Link to this
I think most people realize issue 3 will cause other local entertainment in Ohio to decrease. Most people only have so much money to spend on entertainment—they are not going to increase it for Casinos. That bodes ill for golf courses, nightclubs, restaurants, movie theatres, etc. Most casino customers will leave with less than they came with—how else do you get all that money for the taxes, the employees, the building and the owners!! They depend on lots of net spending-not net winnings!
By Stan
November 3, 2009 2:40 PM | Link to this
Whether you believe in casino gambling or not, this particular proposal is a license to steal, applicable to only one company with no competition and no chance to add any competition. Also, it is primarily being sold based on jobs and tax revenue. I’m from Missouri, and when we voted casino gambling in, I saw firsthand how badly those numbers can get manipulated. If you vote for this based upon future benefits to Ohioans, don’t get your hopes up. This ammendment wasn’t written by Ohioans, but by a single corporation that wants to make money with minimal regulation or oversight.